DCT
2:25-cv-01171
Active Wireless Tech LLC v. BLU Products Inc
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Active Wireless Technologies LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: BLU Products, Inc. (Florida)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Fabricant LLP
- Case Identification: Active Wireless Technologies LLC v. BLU Products, Inc., 2:25-cv-01171, E.D. Tex., 11/26/2025
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant conducts business in the district, offers and sells the accused products through retail stores such as Best Buy and Walmart located within the district, and has previously admitted to or not contested venue in this district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s 3GPP-compliant mobile devices infringe six patents related to wireless communication protocols, including aspects of 5G New Radio (NR) technology.
- Technical Context: The patents-in-suit relate to fundamental operations within modern wireless communication standards, governing how mobile devices manage uplink power control, channel state reporting, system information acquisition, and multicast services.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Plaintiff provided Defendant with actual notice of the patents-in-suit via a letter dated April 11, 2025, to which Defendant allegedly did not respond; this allegation forms the basis for Plaintiff's claim of willful infringement.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2016-08-09 | U.S. Patent No. 10,805,955 Priority Date |
| 2016-08-11 | U.S. Patent No. 10,785,764 Priority Date |
| 2017-06-15 | U.S. Patent No. 10,531,443 Priority Date |
| 2017-08-10 | U.S. Patent No. 10,601,566 Priority Date |
| 2018-01-11 | U.S. Patent No. 10,855,432 Priority Date |
| 2018-05-10 | U.S. Patent No. 11,019,557 Priority Date |
| 2020-01-07 | U.S. Patent No. 10,531,443 Issue Date |
| 2020-03-24 | U.S. Patent No. 10,601,566 Issue Date |
| 2020-09-22 | U.S. Patent No. 10,785,764 Issue Date |
| 2020-10-13 | U.S. Patent No. 10,805,955 Issue Date |
| 2020-12-01 | U.S. Patent No. 10,855,432 Issue Date |
| 2021-05-25 | U.S. Patent No. 11,019,557 Issue Date |
| 2025-04-11 | Plaintiff sends notice letter to Defendant |
| 2025-11-26 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 10,805,955 - “Terminal Apparatus, Base Station Apparatus, Communication Method, and Integrated Circuit,” issued October 13, 2020
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: In wireless systems using unlicensed spectrum, such as Licensed Assisted Access (LAA), a device must perform a “Listen-Before-Talk” (LBT) procedure to ensure the channel is clear before transmitting. This can delay the start of an uplink transmission, creating uncertainty in how to calculate the correct transmit power for the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) (’955 Patent, col. 1:19-27; Compl. ¶35).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method for a terminal apparatus to determine its PUSCH transmit power based on the number of symbols used for the transmission. The number of symbols is calculated using a variable ("NLBT") that is specifically set to 1 when an LBT procedure causes the transmission to be delayed, meaning it does not start at the beginning of a symbol. This creates a rule-based approach to adjust power calculation in response to LBT-induced delays (’955 Patent, col. 2:4-15; Compl. ¶31).
- Technical Importance: This method provides a standardized mechanism for user equipment to manage uplink power in the LAA environment, which is critical for ensuring reliable communication and avoiding interference in shared, unlicensed frequency bands (’955 Patent, col. 1:28-34).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶31).
- Essential elements of claim 1 include:
- A terminal apparatus with transmission circuitry for transmitting a transport block on a PUSCH.
- Physical layer processing circuitry to determine transmit power for the PUSCH based on a number of SC-FDMA symbols (NPUSCH-initial symb).
- The number of symbols is based on a variable "NLBT" and the number of symbols in an uplink slot (NUL symb).
- "NLBT" is 1 when a signal for a symbol with index "l" is generated based on the content of a symbol with index "l+1", representing a time-shifted signal generation.
U.S. Patent No. 10,855,432 - “User Equipments, Base Stations and Methods,” issued December 1, 2020
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: To conserve power, 5G devices can operate on smaller slices of a carrier, known as bandwidth parts (BWPs). A technical challenge is managing the resources for Channel State Information (CSI) reporting when these BWPs are activated or deactivated, as continuously performing measurements for an inactive BWP would waste power (’432 Patent, col. 2:1-12).
- The Patented Solution: The invention specifies a procedure where a user equipment (UE) receives activation and deactivation commands for semi-persistent CSI resources (CSI-RS and CSI-IM) that are explicitly associated with a particular downlink BWP (DL BWP). The core of the solution is the rule that when the associated DL BWP is deactivated, the UE’s processing circuitry considers the corresponding CSI resource configuration to be "suspended," thereby pausing measurement activities without deleting the configuration (’432 Patent, col. 32:4-31 (Claim 1); Compl. ¶44, ¶48).
- Technical Importance: This provides a clear and power-efficient state-management framework for CSI reporting in multi-BWP operations, a foundational element for enabling flexible spectrum use and battery savings in 5G devices.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶44).
- Essential elements of claim 1 include:
- A user equipment that communicates on one or more DL BWPs.
- Receiving circuitry configured to receive an activation command for a semi-persistent CSI-RS and/or CSI-IM resource configuration associated with a DL BWP.
- The receiving circuitry is also configured to receive a deactivation command for that resource configuration.
- Processing circuitry configured to consider the resource configuration "suspended" when the associated DL BWP is deactivated.
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,531,443
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,531,443, “Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) Format Adaptation for 5th Generation (5G) New Radio (NR),” issued January 7, 2020 (Compl. ¶13).
- Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses how a user equipment (UE) reports Hybrid ARQ Acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback, which confirms successful or failed data reception. The invention specifies that for data scheduled in a common search space (CSS), the UE reports a single HARQ-ACK bit for the entire data block, whereas for data scheduled in a UE-specific search space (USS), it reports more granular feedback with HARQ-ACK bits for each code block group (CBG) (’443 Patent, col. 23:14-24:16; Compl. ¶56).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶56).
- Accused Features: The accused functionality is the UE's 3GPP-compliant HARQ-ACK reporting procedures, which allegedly differentiate feedback granularity based on whether the corresponding data was scheduled in a CSS or USS (Compl. ¶¶ 58-59).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 11,019,557
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,019,557, “Apparatus and Method for Acquisition of Periodically Broadcasted System Information in Wireless Communication,” issued May 25, 2021 (Compl. ¶14).
- Technology Synopsis: The patent describes a procedure for a UE to acquire system information (SI). The UE first acquires a primary system information block (SIB1), which contains scheduling information for other SI messages and a parameter for determining acquisition failure. The invention specifies that upon a failure of the SI message acquisition process, the UE is configured to initiate a re-acquisition process to re-acquire SIB1 (’557 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶67).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶67).
- Accused Features: The accused functionality is the UE's 3GPP-compliant process for acquiring system information and its failure-recovery mechanism, which allegedly directs the device to re-acquire SIB1 upon failing to receive other scheduled SI messages (Compl. ¶¶ 71-72).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,785,764
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,785,764, “Information Change Transmission Method and Device for Single-Cell Multicast Service,” issued September 22, 2020 (Compl. ¶15).
- Technology Synopsis: The patent relates to updating multicast control channel (SC-MCCH) information. A UE receives a first type of control information (DCI) to acquire SC-MCCH information. A second DCI format can then be used to indicate a change notification, prompting the UE to acquire new SC-MCCH information using resources indicated by the first DCI format. This creates an efficient two-step process for managing multicast updates (’764 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶80).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶80).
- Accused Features: The accused functionality is the UE's 3GPP-compliant method for monitoring and acquiring updated information for multicast services, which allegedly uses different DCI formats for scheduling and change notification (Compl. ¶¶ 81-84).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,601,566
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,601,566, “Multiple Slot Long Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) Design for 5th Generation (5G) New Radio (NR),” issued March 24, 2020 (Compl. ¶16).
- Technology Synopsis: The patent describes a design for an uplink control channel (PUCCH) that spans multiple time slots. A UE determines this multi-slot configuration from base station signaling and determines a method for frequency hopping. The invention specifies that the number of symbols and their location within each slot of the multi-slot PUCCH remain the same (’566 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶92).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶92).
- Accused Features: The accused functionality is the UE's implementation of multi-slot PUCCH transmissions with frequency hopping, where the PUCCH structure is allegedly repeated consistently across multiple slots as required by 3GPP standards (Compl. ¶¶ 93-95).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The complaint identifies the "Accused Products" as mobile devices sold by Defendant, including but not limited to the F5 5G, Bold K50, Bold N3, View Speed Ultra 5G, and View Speed 5G models (Compl. ¶24).
Functionality and Market Context
The Accused Products are described as 3GPP-compliant smartphones that Defendant sells in the United States through various channels, including its own website, Amazon, Walmart, and Best Buy (Compl. ¶¶ 24-25). The complaint provides visual evidence from Defendant's website showing a range of "All BLU Devices" (Compl. p. 7). The core technical functionality at issue is the devices' alleged implementation of the 3GPP wireless communication standards that correspond to the methods claimed in the patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶¶ 31, 44, 56, 67, 80, 92).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
10,805,955 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| transmission circuitry... configured to... transmit a transport block on a Physical Uplink Channel (PUSCH) | The Accused Products contain transmission circuitry that is compliant with 3GPP standards and transmits transport blocks on the PUSCH. | ¶32 | col. 29:7-9 |
| physical layer processing circuitry, configured to... determine transmit power for the PUSCH at least based on a number of... SC-FDMA symbols NPUSCH-initial symb | The Accused Products' physical layer processing circuitry determines PUSCH transmit power based on the number of SC-FDMA symbols for the initial transmission, as specified in 3GPP standards. | ¶33 | col. 29:10-15 |
| wherein: the number of the SC-FDMA symbols... is given based on NLBT and a number of SC-FDMA symbols included in a uplink slot NUL symb | The number of symbols is calculated based on a formula involving a term corresponding to "NLBT" ("NPUSCH-initial start") and the number of symbols in an uplink slot, per 3GPP standards. | ¶34 | col. 29:16-20 |
| and the NLBT is 1 in a case that a signal of a SC-FDMA symbol with index l is generated, based on a content for resource elements corresponding to a SC-FDMA symbol with index l+1 | When configured for Licensed Assisted Access (LAA) and performing Listen-Before-Talk (LBT), if a transmission does not start at the beginning of a symbol (e.g., as indicated by DCI format 0A), the term "NLBT" is 1. The complaint alleges this corresponds to a time-shifted signal generation as claimed. The complaint provides a table from a 3GPP standard showing "PUSCH starting position" values of '01', '10', and '11' that allegedly trigger this condition (Compl. p. 15). | ¶35, ¶36 | col. 29:21-24 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the claim term "a signal... is generated, based on a content for resource elements corresponding to a SC-FDMA symbol with index l+1" can be construed to read on the 3GPP-specified procedure for a delayed PUSCH start in LAA mode. A defendant may argue that the standard's implementation is technically distinct from the specific mechanism described in the patent.
- Technical Questions: The infringement allegation relies on the Accused Products implementing LAA with LBT procedures that trigger the "NLBT=1" condition. An evidentiary question will be what proof exists that the accused devices actually operate in this specific mode, as opposed to merely being capable of it.
10,855,432 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A user equipment that communicates with a base station apparatus on one or more downlink bandwidth parts (DL BWPs), in at least one serving cell | The Accused Products are user equipments that operate on one or more DL BWPs in compliance with 3GPP standards for 5G NR. | ¶45 | col. 32:4-8 |
| receiving circuitry, configured to receive an activation command for... a semi-persistent... CSI-RS and... CSI-IM resource configuration, the... configuration being associated with a DL BWP... | The Accused Products' receiving circuitry receives activation commands for semi-persistent CSI resources associated with a specific DL BWP, typically via a MAC control element (MAC CE) as defined in 3GPP standards. | ¶46 | col. 32:10-18 |
| the receiving circuitry, configured to receive a deactivation command for the at least one of semi-persistent CSI-RS, and CSI-IM resource configuration | The Accused Products' receiving circuitry also receives deactivation commands for the same semi-persistent CSI resources, also via a MAC CE. | ¶47 | col. 32:19-22 |
| and processing circuitry, configured to consider that the... resource configuration is suspended, in a case that the associated DL BWP is deactivated | The Accused Products' processing circuitry is configured to treat the CSI resource configuration as "suspended" when the associated DL BWP is inactive. The complaint provides a direct quote from a 3GPP standard stating this requirement (Compl. p. 25). | ¶48 | col. 32:23-31 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The dispute may focus on the meaning of "suspended." A defendant could argue that their implementation, while compliant with the standard, does not technically "suspend" the configuration in the manner claimed, but perhaps deletes and re-instantiates it, or uses another mechanism that falls outside the claim's scope.
- Technical Questions: The allegations are heavily tied to 3GPP standard-essential behavior. The primary technical question for infringement will be whether the Accused Products' baseband processor and software architecture can be shown to perform the specific function of "considering" the configuration suspended, as opposed to merely achieving a functionally equivalent outcome through a different logical process.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
U.S. Patent No. 10,805,955
- The Term: "a signal of a SC-FDMA symbol with index l is generated, based on a content for resource elements corresponding to a SC-FDMA symbol with index l+1" (from claim 1).
- Context and Importance: This language is the technical heart of claim 1, defining the condition under which the "NLBT" variable is set to 1. The plaintiff's infringement theory depends on this clause mapping directly to the real-world scenario of a PUSCH transmission being delayed by a Listen-Before-Talk procedure in LAA. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction will determine whether the claim covers the 3GPP standard's implementation or is limited to a more specific embodiment.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The abstract describes this concept in general terms as generating a "time continuous signal of a first SC-FDMA symbol... based on a content of a resource element corresponding to a second SC-FDMA symbol following the first" (’955 Patent, Abstract). This general language may support a construction covering any form of time-shifted signal generation.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description may link this generation process to specific mathematical formulas or signal processing steps for creating a baseband signal with a time offset (’955 Patent, col. 16:47-67). This could support a narrower construction limited to implementations that follow those specific steps.
U.S. Patent No. 10,855,432
- The Term: "suspended" (from claim 1).
- Context and Importance: This term is dispositive for the final limitation of claim 1. The infringement case requires showing that when a BWP is deactivated, the accused device's circuitry places the associated CSI configuration into a state that meets the legal definition of "suspended."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent may use the term "suspended" in its ordinary sense, meaning to temporarily prevent from continuing or being in force or effect. The claim language "configured to consider that the... configuration is suspended" suggests a logical state rather than a specific hardware state, which could encompass any implementation where the UE temporarily ceases to act upon the configuration (’432 Patent, col. 32:23-26).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification could define "suspended" as a formal state within a state machine, distinct from being "inactive" or "deactivated." If the patent distinguishes these states, a defendant could argue that its product, while deactivating the configuration, does not place it in the specifically claimed "suspended" state.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all patents-in-suit. Inducement is based on Defendant allegedly providing user manuals, marketing materials, and technical support that instruct and encourage end-users to operate the Accused Products in their intended, 3GPP-compliant manner (e.g., Compl. ¶¶ 37, 49). Contributory infringement is based on allegations that the accused components are material to the inventions, not staple articles of commerce, and are especially made for use in an infringing way (e.g., Compl. ¶¶ 38, 50).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement of all patents-in-suit based on Defendant's alleged pre-suit knowledge. This knowledge is asserted to arise from a notice letter sent by Plaintiff on April 11, 2025, to which Defendant allegedly never responded (Compl. ¶¶ 26, 39, 51, 62, 75, 87, 98).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope and standards-mapping: Can the specific, and sometimes abstract, language of the patent claims (e.g., the signal generation formula in the ’955 patent) be construed to cover the functional implementations described in the 3GPP standards that the accused products allegedly practice?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of proof of practice: Beyond alleging compliance with 3GPP standards, the case will likely depend on what technical evidence is presented to demonstrate that the accused smartphones actually execute the specific, claimed functionalities in real-world or laboratory conditions, such as using multi-slot PUCCH with frequency hopping ('566 patent) or suspending CSI configurations when a BWP is deactivated ('432 patent).
- A third central question may concern patent validity: Given the patents' close relationship to functionalities defined in public wireless standards, the litigation may focus on whether the claimed inventions represent patentable advances over the prior art, which could include contributions to the standards bodies and earlier drafts of the standards themselves.